Openings That Club Players Shouldn't Play

It is often noted that some openings are too complicated or theoretical and are a waste of time to play. But are there openings that lead to positions that are simply unimportant to know? 

I notice that a some players get bored of things like the queen's gambit declined or the king's pawn openings. They usually end up playing things like the Benoni, Dutch, Latvian and other attacking things. But these openings often lead to pawn structures and complicated play that you will see nowhere else in chess. Isn't that a good reason not to play them?

In other openings you can get normal structures like isolated pawns, minority attacks, or Slav structures. But in things like the Benko it seems that play requires knowledge of things that seem useless in everyday games. You will almost never get a Benoni pawn structure if you play classical things and even if the possibility comes you will rarely be forced into it. 

So although you might get some wins, likely because of some misunderstanding of the positions or simple tactics, is it ever worth it to play into these openings or to even learn the pawn structures? It always seemed to me that such positions were unrelated to normal chess and were just played to get odd positions to complicate the game. But by playing things like the Benko it seems that it will only make you better at a handful of isolated positions that you won't face elsewhere.

Play what you like.  1...e5 is recommended against 1.e4 because you'll run into holes in your opponent's understanding faster, or so the line goes.  I wouldn't recommend the Latvian however since the best line for white is pretty well known (ask Pfren about it) and I think it's this one:

Yeah I just play 3.Nc3 there and play seems natural for White. It can sometimes transpose into the Philidor countergambit which can be met in the same way. 

But I'm not really concerned with the theoretical standing of these things but rather their usefulness in being able to learn from the games you play and getting experience.

The Benoni and Benko are not that strange. You can get Modern Benoni like structures in the Closed Spanish, 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Nd7 12. Nbd2 13. exd4 cxd4 14. Nc6 d5 or 9...Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. a4 h6 13. Bc2 exd4 14. cxd4 Nb4 15. Bc1 c5 16. d5 Nd7. The Benko involves compensation for a pawn. Time and open lines on the queenside.

You want to avoid memorizing theory not learning diffrent pawn structures. As long as you play chess and study your games you should learn something.

Gruenfeld is the first that comes to mind. It's way too theoretical in practice.

Spanish marshall gambit, for the same reason as Grunfeld.

Catalan, way too subtle and positional for a club player to handle well. There are muc easier options against the QGD.

I think I understand what you are trying to say here, and it is actually a pretty interesting ponder..but I don't really think things are ever really that concrete. 1 move is always only 1 move...and what I mean by that..the decision to play certain line, however critical, it  is still a single move, and thus countless different types of positions arise with every move you make.

I think a better question here is: are there certain openings that lead to positions that are weak or unsatisfactory and wish to avoid, and thus are 'unimportant' to learn?....because who wants to learn how to play hopless and despairing positions?

and of course, the answer to that question would be yes.

The nice thing about being a club player is you can play any damn opening you want and maybe even get away with it.

Ok, didn't really read OP.

Well the answer theres multiple answers to your question.

If you intend to learn different openings pawn structures to add to your knowledge of possible positions, then yes, openings like the benko and sveshnikov would be quite useless.

However, if you intend to use the benko and sveshnikov mostly exclusively, then its not really a problem, after why, why study slav/caro pawn structures if you never reach them?

TheCheesyPita, you can learn those openings, but not to play, but play against.  If you lose to the Basman's Defense for example your club may rip on you for some time. 

Most of the clubplayers know the theory of the main openings like the Ruy or QG etc. I used to play a lot of offbeat openings like the Trompovsky , Benko , Torre-attack and the KIA ( KI attack) and had a lot of success with that. I think you should play the things you like , that make you feel comfortable.

GM Lev Alburt almost exclusively played the Aljechin and the Benko with black. Very predictable , but he knew very much about it.

I think it's all a matter of taste.

Under 1900, most any opening is sound, if you know how to pay it. Regardless of what Grandmaster Whoever Justbuymybookov would have your believe.

I think you missed the point. It's true knowing pawn structures increases your skill in position with those pawn structures.

I used to play the benko and sveshnikov, however, i do not use any of my knowledge of pawn structures in these openings for my games.
The problem is they are too unique and do not apply to any positions I play.

Even if they do give some benefit, there are a thousand pawn structures which would be more instructive, so no club player should really ever need to study them.

The sveshnikov pawn structures do repeat in najdorf lines, so if you plan to make the sicilian a weapon that knowledge has some value.  That said I find that knowing an opening usually at least offers the option of a transposition idea in at least a few lines.  This is especially useful when your opponent plays odd moves.  Once I started off with a sicilian dragon-like thing and ended in a KID-esque attack (it was a very bizarre game), so knowing things even in very different structures tends to pay off. It wasn't a transposition or anything, but if I'd never played the KID it wouldn't have come to me (I think the KID is one of those structures you don't tend to see much outside of itself).  PGN below if interested, badly handled opening on my part honestly. If it's sound(ish) and you like it, that's probably enough to be worth learning in my book.

I somewhat disagree with the thesis of the OP.

Im not sure you can just decide to play certain structures and really learn them and never worry about anything outside of those tight parameters. Your opponent can always guide the game into other directions. For instance he can sac a piece or two and then your nice little controllable positional world is gone bye-bye

I would think that a club player needs a WIDE range of openings and types of games for overall development.

It is often said that one doesnt even need to study openings at the club level....well one certainly doesnt need to SPECIALIZE.

I have a buddy that is mr control freak positional player. He loves queen trades and static positions and endgames. I played a latvian gambit against him even though I didnt know the theory at all and I had him busted in no time. He was probably 1850uscf at the time and is expert now. The flaw to his game is that he is a little one dimensional

Some positions have "regular" characteristics such as you named; Caro-slav, Benoni, Stonewall, etc. Those games proceed logically on well trodden ground. On the other hand many positions simply become what I call "shattered" to where there is chaos and everything is very unclear and one needs to be very resourceful and creative.

IMO that creativity and resourcefulness can be developed playing openings that lead to unclear/chaotic positions

Its also about your mentality. I think you do yourself a disservice if you think you will only ever encounter certain structures. In that case it will be easy to get you out of your comfort zone

Most people in my club plays e5 against e4.  So I open up with the Scottish Gambit most of the time. It has a 6-2-0 rate of winning against club players :)

the only opening (that I am awear of)  that is just too hard for club players who can't study all the time is the Grunfeld.  there may be more, but im Haven't heard about them yet.

None,  there are no openings that club players should avoid unless the opening is just trash. If a club player knows an opening well, then they should play it, be it Grunfeld or Najdorf. Btw club players can be anywhere from 500 to 2400, at least at my club in MN.